Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35507540›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

'Unheard,' 'uncared for' and 'unsupported': The mental health impact of Covid -19 on healthcare workers in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa.

Bilkis Dawood, Andrew Tomita, Suvira Ramlall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Factors associated with burnout among healthcare providers in a rural context, South Africa.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Bilkis DawoodDiscipline of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Medicine, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-3864-443X
Andrew TomitaKwaZulu-Natal Research Innovation and Sequencing Platform (KRISP), College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Suvira RamlallDiscipline of Psychiatry, School of Clinical Medicine, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As a direct consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic, due to being exposed to chronic and multiple sources of psychological stress, healthcare workers constitute a vulnerable population. Despite the potential impact of Covid-19 on their psychological and physical health, insufficient attention has been given to their mental well-being. The primary objective of this study was to measure and understand this psychological impact on public sector doctors and nurses in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. The secondary objective was to ascertain their perceptions of psychosocial support, specific to Covid-19, within the workplace. This cross-sectional electronic survey was conducted from August to October 2020, following the first surge of the pandemic in the country, and included 312 participants. Depression, anxiety and stress symptoms were assessed with the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 item and post-traumatic stress was measured by the Impact of Events Scale-Revised version. Measures of employer support were assessed using an adapted closed-ended questionnaire. The participants' mean age was 36.6± 9.3 years with three quarters being male (n = 234, 75.0%) and predominantly (n = 214, 72.3%) medical doctors. Numbers of participants with depression, anxiety and stress were 121 (51.5%), 111 (47.2%) and 104 (44.3%) respectively, with 38 (16.2%), 50 (21.3%) and 38 (16.2%) in the combined severe/extremely severe range, respectively. On the Impact of Events Scale-Revised, 34 (13.7%) participants were in the severe range. Subjectively, 63.0% felt that their concerns were not 'heard', 75.1% did not feel 'cared for' and 81.1% and 74.0% did not feel 'physically' or 'psychologically' supported, respectively. High levels of depression, anxiety, stress and traumatic stress, combined with poor perceptions of employer support, highlight the need to identify and address the psychosocial support needs and expectations of healthcare workers for the duration of the pandemic, as well as for the mental health sequelae post-pandemic.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultAnxietyCross-Sectional StudiesDepressionFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMental HealthMiddle AgedPandemicsSARS-CoV-2South Africa

Identifiers

PMID35507540
PMCPMC9067674

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.